NY Times On The End of Film and The End of the Megapixel Race

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Jeremy, Feb 2, 2006.

  1. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    I've already got nearly two terabytes (2000GB) on my current system...
    Mark², Feb 4, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Did I say Gigs? - Sorry, I meant Teras.......
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jeremy

    Alan Browne Guest

    Whatdya mean Liberal?
    Alan Browne, Feb 5, 2006
  4. Jeremy

    Gordon Moat Guest

    David Brooks, who writes a column in NYT, is a staunch Republican . . .
    in fact about as Republican is it gets. However, since I am from Germany
    originally, maybe I am misunderstanding the term "liberal" . . . I
    thought it only referred to Democrats, was a derogatory term, and was
    closely associated with "Socialist".
    Gordon Moat, Feb 5, 2006
  5. You know, respectful of the rights of man, supportive of freedom, that
    sort of thing. *Liberal*. The good guys.
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 5, 2006
  6. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    Mark², Feb 5, 2006
  7. My TRS-80 'Model I' used a tape recorder.

    And our father made us get up before we went to bed, and he forced us to
    dig our own graves...
    Bob Harrington, Feb 5, 2006
  8. Jeremy

    Alan Browne Guest

    That's pretty much what Graham was (tongue in cheek) implying.
    Alan Browne, Feb 5, 2006
  9. That's what they want you to think; that's what they're trying to
    change the term to mean.

    But we still talk about the "liberal deomcracies" as the good guys.
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 5, 2006
  10. Jeremy

    Beach Bum Guest

    My first PC didn't have a HD. :)

    and we didn't even have zeros and ones, we had to use lower case L and
    capital O. <g>
    Beach Bum, Feb 5, 2006
  11. Jeremy

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    That's what they want you to think; that's what they're trying to
    The vast majority of the American public never understood what socialist
    meant anyway, Americans equate socialism with communism, they aren't the
    same thing by the way. France for example is a socialist country to a
    certain degree, and I don't think anyone can claim it's a communist country.
    Joseph Kewfi, Feb 5, 2006
  12. Yes, I was. But it is true that the NY Times has become very socialistic
    during recent years, and has come into disfavor with the "mainstream"
    American as a result. They used to enjoy top billing, along with the CS
    Monitor, and the WS Journal. Today their ranking is considerably lower,
    mostly because of their obvious editorial liberal bias.
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
  13. Well, Socialism is an economic system, and Communism is a political system,
    so they aren't the same thing. But, unfortunately, socialism will only work
    under a strong central government such as communism, because if people are
    given their druthers, they will not work, and will just live off the dole.
    The, "To each according to his needs" part works very well, but the "From
    each according to his ability" doesn't work worth a damn, unless there is
    someone with a big gun standing there forcing it all the time.......And even
    the Soviets weren't able to keep doing that.......
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
  14. Jeremy

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    But, unfortunately, socialism will only work under a strong central
    government such as communism, because if people are
    You've a very low opinion of humanity, so you think everyone in this world
    is only motivated to get out of bed because of the pursuit of money is it?
    Joseph Kewfi, Feb 5, 2006
  15. I speak from my experience with my American contemporaries over the last 50
    years or so. - I have been living and working in the US for my entire life,
    and I am now 70 years old and retired. - If your experience is different,
    then you are welcome to tell us all about it......
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
  16. Sorry for my hasty answer....I had a personal problem, and couldn't give you
    a more considered answer. I didn't mean to imply that everyone only works
    for money and hates their job. There are some people who are lucky enough to
    find jobs they really like, and would work at them even if they didn't get
    paid at all. I was lucky enough to find a job like that after I had been in
    the work force for about 10 or 12 years. But unfortunately, there are a lot
    of people in this country that are overqualified for the work they do. They
    have college educations and are doing things that could be easily done by
    High Schoolers. And a lot of these jobs are boring, or hard work that is no
    fun at all. Some of these people will take off work every chance they get. I
    don't blame them. As I say, for about 10 years I had a job I hated, and it
    was no fun for me either, to drag myself out of bed and go to work. I don't
    blame people who are in a position like that for staying on the dole if they
    can. Especially if the dole system is set up to discourage people from going
    to work, and sometimes it does just that.
    All things considered, I would estimate that more than half of the workers
    in this society are working at dull uninteresting jobs that they don't like,
    and are overqualified for. So that is one good reason why they will not put
    out their full output every day, and will shirk their duty if they can get
    away with it. And this is, in my opinion, why socialism won't work, at least
    in this country. If these people can get on the public dole, they will.
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
  17. Jeremy

    Alan Browne Guest

    Doesn't explain the fact that communist Russia put up far more space
    flights, satelites and cosmonauts with fewer fatalities than the US.
    What they build might not be pretty or sleek, but it works.

    You can't do that without committed, passionate people.

    Italy is decidedly socialist, and (in an Italian way) works quite well.
    Sweden, Switzerland, France, Norway, Germany and others can all be
    termed socialist to varying degrees, and all work very well.

    In a recent study of 24 industrialized nations, guess what nation was
    dead last in medical care? (I shouldn't bray too hard, Canada was a
    disappointing 14th. Japan was #1.).

    Alan Browne, Feb 5, 2006
  18. Jeremy

    Joseph Kewfi Guest

    All things considered, I would estimate that more than half of the
    But William, Socialism isn't just about dole. Any way , in many European
    countries that could be considered Socialist, the dole is only available for
    a limited period, it isn't indefinite and you're required to prove you have
    been seeking re-employment, after a specific time if you cannot prove that
    you've been seeking re-employment the dole is cut.
    Joseph Kewfi, Feb 5, 2006
  19. Yes, and people here in the US who have those kinds of jobs (I did, for 30
    years) are also committed and passionate, but these kinds of jobs are very
    few and far between. We live in a society of college educated people working
    as grocery clerks..........

    The US is socialist to some degree.....I am not sure yet whether it
    works.....give it another 500 years......

    Well, I'm not sure what you mean by, "...dead last in medical care." If you
    are applying a socialist measuring stick to medical care, then perhaps we
    are dead last. If you measure "medical care" by drug development, then
    perhaps we are not dead last. In my case, I foresaw the fact that I was
    going to get old and sick, and took steps to provide myself and my wife for
    that eventuality by insuring myself against it. I can't speak for what
    others did, or may do in the future. Also, I don't see any difference
    between starving to death, and dying because of inadequate medical care. In
    either case, you are just as dead. But apparently, there are some people who
    don't see any similarity between these two events, and they insist that
    their government take a percentage of their tax dollars and use them to
    provide medical care for everyone, regardless of financial status.....That
    way, the poor will only starve, but will have all the medicines they could
    ever need right up to their dying breath. I guess what I am trying to say is
    that if you are a "full boat socialist" then you will want your government
    to take every penny you make in taxes and provide you with everything that
    they (the government) decides you need. If you are a "zero socialist" person
    such as I, then I want my government to stay out of my face, and let me
    spend my tax dollars on what I want to spend them on. If I choose starvation
    over inadequate medical care, well, that's my choice......
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
  20. That's good. I think that is the way it is beginning to happen here, too.
    There are some states that have started welfare cut back programs like that.
    It will be a great improvement, because there are families here who have
    been on government welfare programs for generations.....
    But welfare isn't the only think I don't like about socialism. Socialism
    takes away your personal freedom to live the lifestyle you like. It limits
    variation. It only works if everyone is restricted in the way they live, and
    doesn't deviate too far from the way everyone else lives. Ants are really
    good at it. As a human being, I consider it intolerable. I want the right to
    work my fanny off and become rich.....Or, to not work at all, and live under
    the freeway underpass, and beg money from passersby to buy my daily ration
    of booze, and eat my gruel at Father Hannigan's Soup Kitchen......
    It's called, free choice, and I love it!
    William Graham, Feb 5, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.